Pryro Posted August 13 Posted August 13 Hi everyone, I’m new here but been into pyro for 15 years or so, wanted some opinions on black powder alternative recipe I normally use, for coate rice hulls and we pretty much everything but works well, I use when get low on willow, and saves on nitrate over period, but works amazingly well an no dext or red gum needed, lower ignition of sugar ag hotter pussure with charcoal, wanted see if anyone ever tried simalar or opinnions 87.5 potassium nitrate 12.5 willo charcoal 12.5 powder sugar 12.5 sulfer
Pryro Posted August 14 Author Posted August 14 Left out What I use normally use and always works amazingly well for me is 90 potassium nitrate 15 willow charcoal 15 sulfur just wanted to see some of the opinions of others and or other ideas on it
Richtee Posted August 14 Posted August 14 2 hours ago, Pryro said: Left out What I use normally use and always works amazingly well for me is 90 potassium nitrate 15 willow charcoal 15 sulfur just wanted to see some of the opinions of others and or other ideas on it The numbers seem bit...err...off...
Pryro Posted August 14 Author Posted August 14 The actual original was 70 10 10 10 but I ball mill x25% most days
Pryro Posted August 14 Author Posted August 14 Oh the other was originally 93.75 potassium nitrate 15.625 willow 15.625 sulfur but I dropped back to 90 15 15 and was happy with it
Carbon796 Posted August 14 Posted August 14 Most pyro formulas are expressed as parts or percentage . . . 1
LiamPyro Posted August 14 Posted August 14 Sugar is quite hygroscopic… does this cause any problems with your mixtures?
Pryro Posted August 14 Author Posted August 14 Moisture isn’t a problem and doesn’t effect i or at least doesn’t seam to, , I was sceptic when I first started working with it, and actually used poplar charcoal instead of willow because of moisture factor and my doubts about it , but was shocked and pleased when I got it where I wanted it, and made my first batch fuse with it, ive been using it quite often sense, it mills up fairly quickly as long as everything is pre milled, I think most that makes a batch of it will be pleased, but I’ve hadn’t had any issues with moisture or not noticing any anyway, I do use denatured alcohol 200 proof, and if I’m out I’ll use acetone or 91% alcohol, it dries quickly, not sure that makes any difference,
Richtee Posted August 15 Posted August 15 11 hours ago, Carbon796 said: Most pyro formulas are expressed as parts or percentage . . . All my rubs and brines as well. It’s the right way.
Pryro Posted August 15 Author Posted August 15 Yes very true, Everything is percentages and parts, and I’ve made 1000s of combo over the years and failed more than worked out, and sugar has more energy potential than gun powder if you read up on it, why sugar is used in sugar rockets, holds lower ignition and lots more gas an burn pressure to offer the table, and I’ve not had moisture issues, lucky I guess, it’s why I added to my list of pyrotechnics, just wanted share see if anyone else had tossed it around with some with luck, or better ideas, I have lots of different pyro formulas milled an in cabinet, some good some bad an d some lead to what I use now, but learned many years ago don’t nock it to you try it, don’t rule out anything and the best blue star hero formula is still Chasing the rabbit
Carbon796 Posted August 15 Posted August 15 You might agree that everything is percentages/parts. But, a good percentage of your posts seem to give as processed weights. Which convey no real information. If you read up on it. You need to decide if you want to compare a sugar fueled formula to Black powder or Gun powder. They are two distinctly different compounds. The popularity of sugar fueled rockets ( and compounds ) probably lends itself to popular mechanics type magazines and ads from the Teleflight Corp. With its ease of manufacture/procurement. And limited skill/knowledge/proper equipment required. If there was truly any advantages to it. It would have been adopted into mainstream use decades ago. By multiple entities.
Pryro Posted August 15 Author Posted August 15 I’ve been working with sugar an black powder for over a decade, test, velocity, burn rate, exc. funny 1 gram sugar has equivalent to what about 20 or so 22 shells, and I wander why triple seven one of the hotter black powders is sugar based, only was sharing for those of interest
Arthur Posted August 15 Posted August 15 True BP has been developed over hundreds of years, it should only contain Potassium Nitrate, charcoal and sulphur. The formula should be a good mix of performance and stability in storage -which in the early days meant stored in cold damp unheated places. If your formula works for you that's great but it takes 10 to 50 years to see how stored powder lasts when cyclic damp winters come round yearly, maybe the sugar will cake up maybe not.
Pryro Posted August 15 Author Posted August 15 18 minutes ago, Arthur said: True BP has been developed over hundreds of years, it should only contain Potassium Nitrate, charcoal and sulphur. The formula should be a good mix of performance and stability in storage -which in the early days meant stored in cold damp unheated places. If your formula works for you that's great but it takes 10 to 50 years to see how stored powder lasts when cyclic damp winters come round yearly, maybe the sugar will cake up maybe not. That’s is a very good point, I still have the first batch I made with the poplar, over ten years ago in mill form, I made a video of it, when I got it out of the cabinet and opening for the first time in ten years, still same as day it was made an even burns same, tried uploading i couldn’t get it up loaded for some reason, I also never said it was better but an alt if low on materials, for over a decade I’ve made different lengths barrels and twist an calibers, and spent a lot time testing an working with it, with amazing results,and I ended up adding it in to my pyro, but l never said it was better I was only trying to share over decade of results, with tons of of charts of info and comparison an results
Pryro Posted August 15 Author Posted August 15 For an example, hodgons triple seven I referred to as an example earlier, only because it’s one of many where it’s a sugar based propellant with lots advantages over traditional black powder, with lower ignition and it’s sulfur less, burns hotter cleaner and doesn’t have the smell, with higher velocity and energy, their is a lot of sugar based black powder propellants or subs that are sugar based for traditional black powder alts, with lots of advantages to be gained over traditional black powder, especially just to have for a sub or alternative when low on other materials it been handy for me
Zumber Posted August 16 Posted August 16 It can burn too hot, leading to overpressure in some devices designed for regular BP. Sugar is hygroscopic (absorbs water), making granules sticky or crumbly unless sealed. Pressed or corned grains can break down more easily. Without confinement (like in an open line test), sugar mixes can burn more slowly than BP, which is bad for priming or fuses. Sugar softens/melts before ignition, which can cause clumping and uneven burn in some uses. Sugar propellants are not suitable for lifting fireworks shells or for fuses where a fast, reliable burn is needed — risk of misfires or erratic timing. Even more sensitive to humidity than charcoal BP — storage stability is poor unless kept airtight. Sugar as a fuel can make an excellent rocket propellant or color star fuel in certain formulas, but it’s not a good direct substitute for charcoal in black powder for lifting, breaking, or priming. The burn characteristics, ignition temperature, and hygroscopicity make it unsuitable for many BP roles without significant redesign.
Pryro Posted August 16 Author Posted August 16 47 minutes ago, Zumber said: It can burn too hot, leading to overpressure in some devices designed for regular BP. Sugar is hygroscopic (absorbs water), making granules sticky or crumbly unless sealed. Pressed or corned grains can break down more easily. Without confinement (like in an open line test), sugar mixes can burn more slowly than BP, which is bad for priming or fuses. Sugar softens/melts before ignition, which can cause clumping and uneven burn in some uses. Sugar propellants are not suitable for lifting fireworks shells or for fuses where a fast, reliable burn is needed — risk of misfires or erratic timing. Even more sensitive to humidity than charcoal BP — storage stability is poor unless kept airtight. Sugar as a fuel can make an excellent rocket propellant or color star fuel in certain formulas, but it’s not a good direct substitute for charcoal in black powder for lifting, breaking, or priming. The burn characteristics, ignition temperature, and hygroscopicity make it unsuitable for many BP roles without significant redesign. yes hygroscopic prone, and loaded with carbon makes it excel for stars, an for black powder it’s the formula that makes it work, not solely made the sugar, and how stable and dependable depends what mixed with, just like any other comp, when milled with proper components making correct formula, that’s what has biggest impact an makes it work, I’ve got some that’s 16 years old and was made with poplar and it’s hotter the than most bp and it’s been canned for 16 years, mill form, sorry tried share, but sugar milled with charcoal proper amounts, I’ve found it not have no problems with moisture or I’ve been really really lucky I guess, Funny all this because ask if anyone tried it, all the answer I received an how I got flamed over it, an no one has even experimented with it, I guess scientific America along with a lot other are wrong, why sugar based propellant subs for black powder is available with way better performance, and as for fuse, get formula right an try it and then answer that one again, I’ve got a batch I ball milled 16 years ago in canister in my shop and is as good as day it was made and had not been touched until yesterday, i video it so I have proof, I only ask a question and wanted to see what other used when low on material, it was all the others barking that got the garbage started, and they have never tried it or worked with it but already now more, I was warned only read and chime in some but don’t try have an open discussion, an all I ask if anyone tried it or had better ideas on it. And it went where intantly, and mostly they have never had went down that road and I’ve been doing formulas for years with it , and tons of ballistic reports, a lot went south yes badly, but some was way better, sugar has a lot carbon and it’s moisture prong, but mixed right and right formula is right, you’d be shocked, i have test results all the way around to prove it, I appreciate so many on this site an have for years, so many brilliant people and minds to learn an grow from, but one loud and boastfull ruins that for all, it’s like This on all the rest forum’s, if not interested, or find reasons to bit.., err… why, just pass an leave for those interested and if no one is, at least boastful loud arrogantly want ruine it for everyone else, look through thier post, happens often my only an last post, sorry everyone this turned to a drama post
Pryro Posted August 16 Author Posted August 16 We wasn’t discussing primary using pure sugar for a bp formula , only adding small portion to the formula, and when milled with charcoal in right portions, no moisture problems at all, kinda works out like graphite does in the correct portions added to bp, except the charcoal speeds things up little
Arthur Posted August 16 Posted August 16 BP with very few variants of mix has been standard for some hundreds of years, maybe since BEFORE sugar was retail. But if it works for you.... However most batch failures for BP are due to either the natural variation of natural ingredients, or failure to follow exactly the correct process.
Pryro Posted August 16 Author Posted August 16 I agree, 100 percent, when I say failed, I didn’t mean it didnt work just results didnt achieve the standards I was shooting for, and you are so correct when it comes bp, process is everything, an like I stated earlier, way off topic, what I posted and it know has been turned into is completely two different things,
Pryro Posted August 16 Author Posted August 16 And to be clear when I say the standards I shootings for, i was only meaning, ballistically, muzzle velocity, energy, down range speeds, clean burning, ignition point, gas pressure and burn rate, an more, and lots of time formulas with a lot of other different variables like barrel length, twist, calibers and so on, but it’s not my primary or my go to, never said it was and never said it was better in anyway but it does work an work very well as a sub, all I was saying
Pryro Posted August 16 Author Posted August 16 Funny in pyro how many and dose it very abruptly whit sugar been hygroscopic, one jumps train, here we go sort things, but point Bering how many formulas do you use on normal bases that has components that’s is very hygroscopic, no difference than sugar benzo burst, - potassium benzoate how hygroscopic is it, but yet harder you lean on Benzo the harder the break? whistle mix - sodium salicylate and is hygroscopic can sub with potassium benzoate but fonts gat a hot and hard brake and so on, just quick two of many, an not getting off topic
Carbon796 Posted August 17 Posted August 17 On 8/15/2025 at 1:43 PM, Pryro said: I’ve been working with sugar an black powder for over a decade, test, velocity, burn rate, exc. funny 1 gram sugar has equivalent to what about 20 or so 22 shells, and I wander why triple seven one of the hotter black powders is sugar based, only was sharing for those of interest Triple seven is NOT Black powder. With 10yrs " experience " .You should be able to make, and understand the distinct. Differences between true Black powder, Black powder substitutes, and propellant/nitro glycerin based Gun powders.
Recommended Posts